The 2018
elections prove what began to become obvious in 2016: many Democrats believe that if they or their
candidate does not win then the result is illegitimate.
One would
have to have been living on a deserted island for the last 2 years to not
realize that the Democrats still cannot accept the fact that their presidential
candidate lost the election. They
continue to mount attack after attack on the winner of that election to prove
that his presidency is somehow illegitimate.
Now we see
the same sentiment expressed in many of the midterm elections. We could begin by talking about the
questionable tactics following close votes and then the sudden appearance of
previously undiscovered votes – these suddenly produced ballots may simply be
the result of incompetence, or they may be the result of something more. Perhaps they reflect the view that any means
necessary, including counting illegitimate ballots, is acceptable in order to
produce a win for your candidate. We
will probably never have a definitive answer on that question. But, we will always wonder if the call of the
losing Democrat candidates to “count every vote” is meant to include both
legitimate and illegitimate votes.
But, beyond
that, look at the difficulty that the Democrats have in conceding. When it is obvious they cannot win they will
file lawsuit after lawsuit to attack the results. In many of these races, the national and
outside Democrat interests have millions invested in the race (making politics
anything but local!) and even after a win for their candidate is completely
hopeless and the candidate concedes, the winners are immediately attacked as
illegitimate with assertions that they somehow stole the elections, as well as having
the now typical Democrat epithets thrown at them (racist, supremacist, etc.). The voters are then also attacked (for
example, a recent CNN panel attacked “white women Trump voters” as racist and white
supremacists).
When they
finally realize that the votes just are not there for their victory, the
Democrats often concede without conceding.
In Florida, Gillum conceded, withdrew his concession, conceded
again. Nelson, who finally conceded to
Scott, did so only after filing scores of lawsuits. In Georgia, Abrams finally conceded but refuses
to call Kemp’s victory legitimate, saying “I think it was wrong.” (apparently
if you lose then that is wrong, and the winner’s victory is illegitimate.)
So what does
this inability to accept one’s loss say about one’s understanding of our
democracy? It is an inability to accept
the very core premise of our democracy – that there will be a fair and honest
vote in which the people will decide.
This means that sometimes the people do not want what your candidate is
selling and you lose. And the loser
needs to lose gracefully, concede, to wish the winner and our democracy well. Only those who believe that they know better
than the people, that they are somehow entitled to be in power, would see a
loss as something so wrong that it makes the victory of their opponent
illegitimate.
Yet, this is
exactly how many Democrats seem to view our elections. They believe they should be in power because
they know what is right for all of us.
They would prefer not to listen to the people’s voices and, when those
voices disagree with theirs then they simply believe that those voices are wrong
or that there has been some illegal act that has stolen victory from their
candidate. They claimed the Russians did
it in 2016. In 2018 they claim that it
is somehow the fault of a variety of perfectly valid election laws. They claim unspecified tampering. They blame the voters. Yet, isn’t it interesting, that any actual
evidence of tampering more often than not points towards the Democrats.
In this
country, we have elections and when they are over, the losers, while unhappy,
need to accept and respect the result. They many not like the individual who
now holds the office, but they need to respect the office and give support to
its holder, because such support reflects a support for our country and its
democracy. And note, support does not
necessarily mean agreement with every policy decision or action; our country
thrives on diverse views. But, our
country also thrives on elections that provide the will of the people in our
government of, for, and by the people.
The Democrats' inability to accept and their readiness to attack the will of the people is
very telling. In my opinion it evidences
not a concern for the people or for our democracy, but rather an unquenchable thirst
for their own power – a thirst that is willing to ignore the people and our
very democracy in order to achieve that focused goal. It is the similar thirst for power that one
sees in the sham elections that occur regularly in a variety of dictatorships
around the world.
This thirst
of the Democrats shows no sign of abating.
With a majority in the House, rather than work on legislation for the
good of the people and the country, the Democrats appear to be focused only on
investigations and attacks against anyone in power who is not one of them. Rather than accepting a variety of state elections
and letting those who won get on with the business of governing, the Democrats
will use the courts to mount attack after attack upon the winners and the
results.
Disagreements
over policy are one thing, they are a healthy requirement of democracy, but
attacks on any differing voice and a total intolerance of opposing views is completely
contrary to the very core of our democracy.
Yet, that intolerance is exactly what the Democrats inability to accept
the legitimacy of an opponent’s victory reveals. A true believer in our democratic form of
government will respect and support, not attack the voice of the people. They understand that their power is
subservient to that of the people.
The
Democrats simply do not understand that Democracy means that sometimes you lose
and that the appropriate response is to accept that defeat, continue to express
your differing views while working with the winner for the good of the country and
its people.